WIXLIB

P5341.2Project Planning and ManagementUnit 3Stakeholder analysisAs a first stage it is important to carry out a preliminary stakeholder analysis. Thisenables identification of the primary stakeholders, as well as partners and their roles.Greater understanding of interest groups and their interest should result in a betterquality project.Stakeholders are individuals, groups or organisations who have an interest or stakein a project. They may be direct or indirect interests, and positive or negative. Theirstake in the project may be in terms of their rights or duties or they may be affectedby the outcome.Different roles for stakeholders can be identified at this stage, and these can bedeveloped as the project progresses. Different organisations can play different rolessuch as sub-contractors, delivery agency, enabling agency etc. Furthermore, it is alsopossible to identify if any interest groups present threats to the success of theprojects, and plans can be put in place to respond to any such events.There is increasingly a focus on the identification of agriculture and ruraldevelopment initiatives using a ‘bottom-up’ learning approach which emphasises theimportance of primary stakeholders informed and participating in the identificationstage. For process projects which encourage learning from experience, and listeningto participants, engaging with stakeholders from the outset is particularly important.The outcome of the stakeholder analysis at this stage is that the primary stakeholderis identified before the objectives of the project are finalised. This ensures that theproblem analysis relates specifically to the primary stakeholders.Stakeholder tables are often constructed which provide a structured format forassessing the interest of each group.StakeholdergroupInterestPotential impactPotentialinfluencePossible rolePrimary Secondary ExternalStakeholder tables can be developed in different formats, for example, 1.2.1 showsthe different stakeholders, their interest in the project, and whether their interest ispositive or negative. SOASCeDEP8

P534Project Planning and ManagementUnit 31.2.1 Example stakeholder tableStakeholderInterest in projectSmall farmers Higher output and incomes Food traders More sales Labourers More jobs Moneylenders Empowered clients Less business Success of project Possible loss of rent if farmers Governmentofficials ve/ vebecome empoweredSource: DFID (2002) p. 2.3.1.2.2 Limitations of stakeholder analysisStakeholder analysis is an effective and commonly used tool, but its use does notguarantee success. There are a number of risks and practical problems that should beavoided in its use. These include:–that the jargon can be threatening to many–the analysis can only be as good as the information collected and used–use of matrices for analysis and presentation can oversimplify complex situations–the judgements used in placing stakeholders in a matrix or table are oftensubjective. Ideally, several opinions from different sources will be used to confirm ordeny the judgement–team working can be damaged if the differences between groups in an activity,rather than their common ground, are over-emphasised–trying to describe winners and losers, as well as predicting hidden conflicts andinterests, can alienate powerful groups–the analysis may lead to the re-emergence of conflicts that had lain dormantSource: DFID (2002) p. 2.4.1.3Problem analysisProjects aim to address a problem or constraint. It is vital to understand the causesof the problem or constraint, how they affect stakeholders, and how to focus ontackling them.A helpful tool for systematically understanding the causes of a problem is theproblem tree method. This involves the identification of a core problem (at thecentre) which is based on the best understanding and sources of informationavailable. It is important to reach agreement amongst the participants of the keycore problem. SOASCeDEP9

P534Project Planning and ManagementUnit 3The causes of the problem are then traced back as the ‘roots’ of the problem andprovide the causal chain.The effects of the problem are then traced forward as the branches and main effectsof a problem on stakeholders.Diagnosis is a crucial stage in project identification and there are many examples ofmistaken diagnosis in project design. Some commonly recognised examples are citedin 1.3.1. Can you add to this list?1.3.1 Typical examples of mistaken diagnosis in project design(1) Failure to understand the motivation of the intended beneficiaries, or the existenceof factors which would restrict their participation in, or response to, a project: egcredit to women farmers.(2) Failure to understand the limits to improvements in institutional performance.(3) Inadequate market analysis of demand and price forecasts for commodities for whichproduction is to be increased.(4) Non-recognition of the degree of dependence of a form of development on subsidieswhich a government may not be able to sustain or is committed to remove undermacroeconomic reforms.(5) Non-recognition of the unattractiveness to entrepreneurs of the services which agovernment seeks to privatise. Simply they are not profitable.(6) Proposals for provision of services by government agencies which could be suppliedmore efficiently and effectively by the private sector.(7) Failure to properly determine and understand the physical locations and causes ofwater losses within an irrigation scheme and also to take account of competing plansfor water use in urban areas.(8) Underestimation of the difficulty in the humid tropics of maintaining soil fertility andstructure, for sustainable annual cropping.(9) Incomprehension of the political and social factors which may militate againstdecentralisation or meaningful peoples’ participation in project design andexecution.(10)Poor assessment of the adequacy of essential infrastructure.Source: unit author Think about one of the following core problems in a development contextwith which you are familiar and develop a problem tree around it,tracing out the key causes and effects of one of these problems.(1) There is limited access to markets for produce(2) Drought has reduced crop yields this year(3) The nearest health clinic is 15 miles away by foot(4) One of the devastating results of HIV/AIDS has been reduced labourin the village SOASCeDEP10

P534Project Planning and Management1.4Unit 3ObjectivesWhen there is agreement and understanding about the core problem and the causesand effects, the project objectives can be specified.The project purpose is developed by restating the core problem in positive terms.The project goal is created by articulating the effects of the problem in positiveterms.Although setting project objectives appears to be straightforward, the process mayprovide insights which could require revisiting the core problem. Overall the approachmay need to be an iterative one. Initial consideration of objectives may promptfurther investigation and data collection, and/or consultation with stakeholders.Trade-offs must be assessed that arise between multiple and conflicting objectives.For example, the objective of raising production of cash crops for export may have tobe weighed against the objective of increasing domestic employment or of improvingequity. The objective of an agricultural sector project could be functional (to providea national service), regional (to develop a particular area), or subsectoral (to expandthe production of a crop) – but can probably not be all of these at once.Selection of a clear and simple objective, such as strengthening a nationalagricultural extension service, may enhance the prospects of success. It may also,however, limit the project’s overall contribution to development unless othercomplementary investments (such as in agricultural research or credit) are alsoundertaken.Section Summary This section has introduced you to project identification and the process tofollow in formulating projects. It has equipped you with tools for ascertaining who the primary and secondarystakeholders are (stakeholder analysis); the problem a project aims to address(problem analysis) and formulating key objectives. SOASCeDEP11

P534Project Planning and ManagementUnit 3Section 1 Self Assessment QuestionsQuestion 1True or false?(a) Project identification is not an important part of the project cycle.(b) Stakeholder analysis should be carried out when the project objective has beendecided.(c) Core problems should be agreed upon by the project team only.(d) Objectives can be set by considering the core problem in a positive light.Question 2Using the following Problem Tree and Objectives Analysis, fill in the blanks.(a) Problem tree analysisDefine the focal problem, its immediate and direct causes and effects(a)Increased demandon health servicesReduced productivityIncreased morbidityand mortalityOutbreak of cholerain Kingstown, StVincentPoor sanitaryconditionsOpen pitlatrinesContaminated watersupplyFlooding inurban areas(b)Poormaintenance ofwater mainsUnhygienic healthpractices and foodpreparationLack ofknowledgeLow levelsof incomeSource: DFID (2002) p. 3.4. SOASCeDEP12

P534Project Planning and ManagementUnit 3(b) Objectives tree analysisTransform each problem statement into an objectiveTourism restoredReduced demand onhealth servicesProductivity restoredDecreased morbidityand mortalityEliminate outbreakof cholera inKingstownSanitary conditionsimprovedPit latrinesimprovedSewermaintenanceimprovedPotable watersupplied in targetareasFlood controlmeasuresimplementedMaintenance ofwater mainsimproved(c)Healtheducation intargetcommunities(d)Source: DFID (2002) p. 3.5. SOASCeDEP13

P534Project Planning and ManagementUnit 32.0 CONCEIVING ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONSSection OverviewIn this section we consider why it is vitally important to ‘open up the alternatives’before settling on a diagnosis of a development problem and a single concept anddesign for a project. This is a difficult issue, but some general approaches and toolsto use are suggested.Section Learning OutcomeBy the end of this section, students should be able to:thoroughly understand how to explore alternative strategies to meet the sameproject objective 2.1Opening up the alternativesExamination and refining of alternative strategies must not be neglected, thoughthere will always be pressures to move rapidly on to detailed project design andappraisal. These pressures may include political interference, the fixing of lendingprogramme targets, limitations in time and resources allocated to projectidentification and formulation, and professional bias (see 2.1.1). If the projectidentification team is pressurised into accepting what appears at first sight to be aviable proposal without looking much further, then subsequent preparation isreduced to simply making the best case for that proposal. Decisions made at thisstage can have far reaching consequences: some are likely to be irreversible nomatter how thorough the subsequent preparation and appraisal, while others maylargely determine the quality of the project and its impact on development. There isno substitute for being right in the first place.2.1.1 Professional bias in project identificationGiven a national development objective such as improved food security irrigationengineers may tend to see irrigation as the preferred way to attain that goal. Within theengineering profession there are sub-groups. Mechanical engineers will look to pumpoptions and civil engineers to dams and canals; agricultural engineers will stress fieldengineering and land levelling. On the other hand a national grain storage agency mayclaim that expansion of its own infrastructure is the only valid approach to achieving thesame goal. If the real problem is a lack of price incentives for cereal growers, thenneither agency’s proposed solution is conceptually valid. Such things need checking atthe identification stage.In project identification it is important to get to the real cause of the problem and notto produce a project that deals with symptoms. Consider the following light-hearted taleabout the medical profession.A man goes to the Doctor with a bad back. The Doctor admits her profession is not goodwith backs but suggests the patient stands in the rain for three hours each day. Thepatient catches severe influenza and returns to the Doctor, now with two ailments, butthe Doctor brightens because she knows how to treat influenza. She is now dealing withsomething she is good at handling.Professionals must not twist the problems of rural people to suit their professional anglesand skills.Source: unit author SOASCeDEP14

P534Project Planning and ManagementUnit 3Conceiving of alternative solutions is where project planners need to be at their mostcreative and imaginative, and where an inter-disciplinary approach and consultationwith the widest practicable constituency are the most important. ‘Open up thealternatives’, should be the byword of all project formulators.Very few problems have only one possible solution. There are no demonstrably ‘right’or ‘wrong’ answers in the design of agricultural and rural development projects: onlyvarying degrees of plausibility and risk. Too often in the past project concepts havebeen processed through appraisal without adequate consideration of alternative, andpossible cheaper or more effective, ways of achieving the same objectives. Whetherthe result of vested interest, of political pressure or simply lack of information onfeasible alternatives, the consequences are the same: opportunities lost or foregone,which can seldom be recaptured.The project identification and preparation process will initially involve choice betweenalternative forms of intervention or project strategy.For example: the objective of a project may be to strengthen the marketing systems for aspecified crop in a given region. This could be achieved through a projectdesigned to strengthen and stimulate private traders, or through public sectorintervention (eg a parastatal, or marketing board), or through promotion offarmer co-operatives. the objective of increasing output of a specific crop might be achieved throughimprovements in research, extension, input supply, access to credit, marketingfacilities and market information; or a combination of these. An alternativecrop might be a substitute.Remember that such choices are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Combinations ofmeasures may be most appropriate. In general back what works and repeat success.In opening up the alternatives it is useful to consider as many different routes aspossible, some will be discarded almost immediately, but others may introduce newideas and insights which may contribute positively to the final project design.The following process is suggested for this.(1) Listing as many likely alternatives as can be thought of.The range of options is likely to broaden if ideas are drawn together from awide range of sources. Chances for brainstorming within the project planningteam, with government agencies, non-governmental contacts and withintended beneficiaries should be cultivated.(2) Consideration of each alternative with a view to eliminating some andcombining others. At this stage consideration of each alternative willstrengthen the justification for and scope of the one which is eventuallyselected. For ranking options, precedent - local or foreign - is likely to be apowerful guide. Have similar solutions in the project area or analogous settingsworked in the past?–Is a pilot exercise or experimental work elsewhere giving promising results?–What are the most successful farmers doing?–Which initiativesunsustainable? SOAShavenotworked,CeDEPorhavebeenproventobe15

P534Project Planning and ManagementUnit 3(3) Selection of promising alternatives for preliminary formulation.The alternatives listed in step 1 may arise from an analysis of existingconstraints. The following example considers this in more detail.Take the project objective to be increased output of beef in a particular region.The present low levels of output may be the result of(a) cattle diseases or parasites, or a combination of both(b) low quality of the breeding stock(c) lack of water during the dry season(d) inadequate feeding (overall, seasonal, and/or a particular nutritional ormineral deficiency)(e) other unknown causeIf any of these constraints were removed, some increase in the output of meat wouldbe expected. If two or more constraints were removed simultaneously, then anotably greater increase in output might be obtained, although the projectintervention would be more costly, complex and difficult to manage.Alternatives may also be joint or complementary in terms of the approach required.Options (a) and (d) above are both susceptible to alleviation through extensionactivities and it may not be worth doing (a) without (d) or vice versa. In fact projectsto address (a), (b) and (d) will all require extension but (b) will also require abreeding programme. Once production has moved to a higher plane (a newproduction function) as a result of one intervention, other more costly projects maybecome economic propositions.The project designers must therefore consider in some detail the feasibility and costsassociated with overcoming each of these constraints, independently, in combinationor in sequence. Suppose that a widespread and regular programme of inoculation ofcattle would alleviate the first constraint (a). The overall cost of doing this, in termsof inputs and personnel must be estimated as well as the likely effectiveness andimpact on the output and quality of meat. Obviously the more widespread andregular the programme is, the higher the costs will be, and at each level these needto be set against the probable benefits. Careful examination of similar projectselsewhere and all relevant documentation, an awareness of the local environment,and reliable information as to the availability of vaccine and appropriately skilledtechnicians will all help the technical expert in this evaluation.It should be borne in mind that costs and benefits are unlikely to rise uniformly withthe scale of operations. The analyst has to ascertain as far as is possible therelationship between costs (resources, inputs, commitment of personnel) andbenefits (probable effect on output of meat) for different scales of projects designedto reduce or eradicate cattle disease. This is so as to be able to compare thisapproach with alternatives.An alternative project might be construction of boreholes (tubewells), which

Unit Three: Project Identification, Formulation and Design Unit Information 3 Unit Overview 3 Unit Aims 3 Unit Learning Outcomes 3 Key Readings 4 Further Readings 5 References 5 1.0 Project identification tools 6 Section Overview 6 Section Learning Outcome 6 1.1 Project identification 6 1.2 Stakeholder analysis 8 1.3 Problem analysis 9 1.4 Objectives 11